When perusing Fascist literature one notices what at first appears to be a glaring contradiction. The State is portrayed as being the will and conscience of the nation made manifest. The center of culture and upholder of national traditions, no individuals or groups can exist outside of its orbit. Fascism can be described as an ideology of the State. Cognitive dissonance starts to set in when this view is applied to the current American State. To even political amateurs it doesn’t take long to realize that the American State encompasses none of the values described above and in many ways works to destroy those same values. When discussing the State in relation to any nation it’s important to realize that what we’re talking about in reality is actually two entities: The true State which fulfills the function of being the creative force of the nation, and the Anti-State which looks to destroy the nation.
As opposed to the Anti-State, which is the opposite of and stands for the destruction of the real and conceptual community. The true State is not based upon an abstract theory of extracting man from the source of his individuality, but of building an institution which is based upon man’s nature and is designed to facilitate the spiritual aspect of that nature. It’s important to remember that both the State and anti-State believe in authority and power, with the contrast being how and to what ends these are applied to. While it’s impossible to look back into time and see the formation of the first State structure taking place. We can extrapolate from human nature. The foundation of humanity is the family, and while it’s still possible for society to continue without its existence, as procreation could still take place. The immediate context in which the child grows up in and the values which give him self-meaning would be absent. Human nature is universal, we all urge for meaning and value in our lives. To be part of something greater than ourselves and while this drive exists in each of us it will manifest itself in opposite poles. The family exists as a hierarchical institution. The desire of the parents to have their children grow into strong moral adults is innate and takes the form of a hierarchy of authority with the Father and Mother establishing rules and norms by which the children are required to obey. As the family unit expands and the needs of that unit become greater the parental authority starts to devolve to an extent upon the older brothers, and sisters, aunts, and uncles, etc. etc. It’s through the enforcement of these rules and norms that the child begins to see that life has a greater meaning than just self-happiness. He sees that his well-being is contingent upon the well-being of the group/family that punishments applied for breaking familial rules, while being unpleasant exist not out of a sadistic desire of the parents but for his own benefit and spiritual development. He sees that his own good exists only within the family hierarchy. The familial institution through its raising of children and providing of support is the beginnings and the foundation of the State. When the family grows to a certain size where rule by one household becomes unmanageable the formal structure of the State manifests itself. The State is the values and norms of the family made manifest into an institutional framework; while the family is the source of meaning to its individual members. The State becomes the source of meaning to the collective families which compose it. Through their interaction with the State those families become a nation.
In the western world today we see the rise of something which has existed at times throughout human history but has never been able to become preponderant, the Anti State. Just as it sounds the anti-state is the opposite of the State. It does believe in power and authority but it uses that power and authority in opposition to human nature; whereas the State is an outgrowth of the family and looks to build upon that structure while cultivating our best instincts. The Anti-State in the name of freedom sees the family as a barrier to be overcome and something to be liberated from. This ideology plays itself out on a daily basis in modern American Society and while the law progressively seeks to emancipate us from our obligations and duties in order to give us the ability to do whatever we please. The more this turning away from the true nature of the State in actuality enslaves us all the more.
While there has lately been a proportional relationship between the size of government and the rise of the anti-state. This is not a concrete equation, but more so from adherence to a mistaken concept of the nature of the State. The size of government doesn’t equate to a gain or loss of freedom. It comes down to which path the society’s leaders decide to take and whether they choose the true path of the state or pursue policies which are aimed at its destruction. The Anti-State didn’t have a profound influence in human history before the 17th century. Its appearances were limited to abuses in governmental power primarily connected with greed and the enrichment of individuals at the expense of the community. This has been an issue since the dawn of time and when discovered an opposite counter movement would always rise in opposition. But beginning in the 17th century this defect in governing was given ideological cover and justification through the enlightenment, reaching its nadir in the United States as deriving its authority from GOD.
One of the main tenets of enlightenment thought is the social contract. A theory which extracts man from his social context and applies rationality and moral worth to the individual independent of the context which gives him that rationality and self-worth. It is then with these faculties that the individual comes together with other similar individuals to form the State as a means of securing property. Instead of the State having a positive purpose derived from human nature and the family, the Social Contract imputes to it the purely negative function of protecting wealth. The advocates of this theory view freedom in a purely formal way; as the absence of government restraint. To protect property it becomes necessary to take away a certain amount of freedom. This view holds that freedom is a purely individual construct. That man in a state of nature absent community, government, and family finds his full amount of freedom. Contract theory is an ideology of the individual, Contract theory is the ideological foundation of the anti-state.
We see the deleterious effects of the anti-state play itself out every day in America. Never before in history has the government been as intrusive and active as it is today and at no other point in American history have people been as unsafe as they are currently. (It’s important to keep in mind that the Anti-State is neither more nor less active than the true State, where the difference lies is in the intended ends of its policies.) Living in cities from Chicago to Detroit can involve risking your life by simply walking down the street. Life has become meaningless to many residents of these areas, and while the government is not the one pulling the trigger, through its policies and proscriptions it’s causing the disconnect people are feeling towards their nation. The structure and meaning individuals receive from the family unit is non-existent in many households as the divorce rate in the United States is approaching 50% and in many poor areas it’s even higher. This leads to a situation where the mother has to work full time and the child is left to the care of day care employees, who while for the most part being good people can’t give the care that family does. Not able to receive the meaning that everyone seeks through the family the young individual seeks that meaning through gangs, sex, drugs, etc.
Instead of recognizing this as the national emergency that in reality it is. Th government celebrates the fruits of their policies as representing a more tolerant, diverse and caring society; while giving lip service to the importance of family unity, but offering nothing in the way of policy solutions. To admit that the causes of this catastrophe are due to philosophic issues would necessitate a reevaluation of over 400 years of individualistic ideology. A realization that Capitalism in its constant pursuit of expanding markets and profits leads to a deterioration of lifestyle and that many times a restriction on individual behavior leads to an increase in self-actualization and more individual freedom. If we wish to stop the decay of the society in which we live in and an eventual rebirth in its place a reevaluation is exactly what is needed.